Future of FS22

[Daks]

I think the Giants should not abandon FS22 like all other previous titles, and keep releasing content for FS22, what do you think?

[mackster]

I think people still play FS19. It will all depend on the success of FS25. Just like F124 bombed, people still prefer F122 (not even F123).

If FS25 is fantastic and a viable upgrade to FS22 then yes, the game will slowly die out as updates won't keep up with computer hardware/software changes, which may need game updates to ensure compatability.

Tho this can take years.

If FS25 bombs, then FS22 will carry on and will be supported probably until FS28 comes along to try again

[greenplant]

Originally posted by kubanskiloewe:

ATS and ETS are pretty outdated all in all now !
I do not play it anymore; graphic is to old .

ETS2 gets just as many players as fs22 to this day

[illgib]

Originally posted by Wizard:

Originally posted by illgib:

How's better for you? That's what i'm asking.
How's better paying a full price for the previous game plus some major mods built in instead of keep playing the previous with the more functional mod?

This is a pointless question. Giants are a company trying to make money, and that doesn't happen by courting their cheapest customers.

I think your anger at the new game has clouded your rationality. Your arguments are making less and less sense.

Still nobody ask me how it's, from a player perspective, worth paying a new game instead of keep using the previous title with mods?
That's the whole point of the discussion.
If from a commercial pov it's not viable keep a title and expand it with dlcs because people then don't buy them, how a new title will be convenient if the new features are already present for free in the previous? How that doesn't stop people from buying it?
Why a dlc it's not viable a new game yes, for the players?

That's the absurdity of the defense against a new title.

[FRANKDREBIN]

Originally posted by illgib:

Originally posted by brian_va:

It's better.for business because eventually you have to buy the new game as the modders move up to the new one.

How's better for you? That's what i'm asking.
How's better paying a full price for the previous game plus some major mods built in instead of keep playing the previous with the more functional mod?

I understand your point, but as I mentioned Civilization and Europa Universallis, two great "old" games, the DLC aren´t much cheap too and brings barely nothing new, if I´d buy it every year it would be as expensive as buying a new game, while on a new game they would be at least forced to make something more different.

If FS would have stopped on, lets say, 2017 and the game only received DLCs people would probably have spent a lot of money and maybe would have less resources than on FS22. MANY would be pleading for a new Farming Simulator to come and "unlock" new possibilities.

I also understand when you say that farming simulation games shouldn´t be released yearly like football games, but you are only seeing the glass half empty. At least Giants has a more or less solid schedule and you know when a new game will come out. Also, this makes the "old" version cheaper or even free.

I think turning off the servers for older game versions can affect players who rely on online ,but apart from this I don´t see any damage caused by a newer game being released. For those who like to download thousands of mods, if the new version isnot good enough or just the same of the older, so you can be cool that the modders will stay working on the older version, right? If not, maybe, only maybe, this new game is really an improvement....

[Wizard]

Originally posted by illgib:

Still nobody ask me how it's, from a player perspective, worth paying a new game instead of keep using the previous title with mods?
That's the whole point of the discussion.
If from a commercial pov it's not viable keep a title and expand it with dlcs because people then don't buy them, how a new title will be convenient if the new features are already present for free in the previous? How that doesn't stop people from buying it?
Why a dlc it's not viable a new game yes, for the players?

That's the absurdity of the defense against a new title.

Every title sells more than the last. So they keep making them. It's not rocket science.

[FRANKDREBIN]

And for those advocating for ETS as an example of how to respect and give value to the players, which is far from simulating a real driving experience or having out of this world graphics, they release any car with a sticker painted on it as paid dlcs.

Their Mediterranean Bundle at full price is almost the same of FS 25 on pre order. We are talking about a 2012 game with three DLCs, two of them made in 2016 and 2017 lmao

[brian_va]

Originally posted by illgib:

Originally posted by Wizard:

This is a pointless question. Giants are a company trying to make money, and that doesn't happen by courting their cheapest customers.

I think your anger at the new game has clouded your rationality. Your arguments are making less and less sense.

Still nobody ask me how it's, from a player perspective, worth paying a new game instead of keep using the previous title with mods?
That's the whole point of the discussion.

buying the new game funds the next one. on some level, thats ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥, but it is what it is.

currently, fs22 (base game) is sufficient, at least to me. i bought it a couple weeks back. to be fair, i have them all back to (edit) fs13. almost certainly i'll buy 25 when its on a decent sale, as by then the modders will have moved on. it wont be because that game is technically superior (lets hope it is), but because thats where the mods and the players are.

i'll meet you halfway and agree that perhaps a "long term release" that is continually updated and supported by dlc can work. but im probably not buying them, and i don['t think im alone. maybe if there is something compelling, but even then, probably not.

[TheOriginalMark:-)]

Originally posted by kubanskiloewe:

ATS and ETS are pretty outdated all in all now !
I do not play it anymore; graphic is to old .

Although they've had rain on the windscreen and wet splashy roads for years - two things that have only just come to FS25....

Oh, and decent fog.

[illgib]

I don't wanna a single game and that's it, no more new ones, but maybe if they just slow down a bit, instead of a fixed publish every three years they could "milk" some more a title before disposing of it for a new one.

Still i can't understand why someone should be ok to buy a new game with some fx and two crops, but not a dlc with the same contents, because you could otherwise have for free by mods.
Then it prove my point, why buy the new game if you can have them for free?

But that's probably just me.

[brian_va]

If they released every 6 instead, you almost certainly would have stagnation. Major improvements such as engine upgrades are almost never a dlc, it's a mainline patch, or generally a new game. Obviously we are speculating here, but I'd bet we would get 6 years of branded dlc and a couple maps with substantial improvements now 6 years apart instead of every 2.

Obviously I would prefer not to spend 30 bucks every couple years to get the new game on a sale, but I realize that is the reality of the world, stuff costs money.

[terry]

Originally posted by illgib:

Originally posted by Seftak:

I'd prefer the devs not going under because they made 1 game 10 years ago and that's it.

How can they go down if instead of a new game evert three years they sell dlc for one?
Where i said they should give everything for free?

Are you ok for a 50€ mandatory "upgrade" every three years instead of 30€ dlcs that add the same things?
American and Euro truck seems pretty whealty and their games are 12 years old, still they keep getting update, dlc and old map reworks, doesn't sound as a failure market.

Well $50 every three years for a new game or $30 every year for a DLC(that would be $90 over a 3 year period). Think I'll take the new game. Besides, I never pay full price for games but I'm a patient person. I dont have to have a game the day of release. I just got around to buying FS22 last year during the summer sale, I'll wait for a good sale to buy FS25 as well.

[ProviD]

Originally posted by Seftak:

I'd prefer the devs not going under because they made 1 game 10 years ago and that's it.

EA doesn't need your help btw

[Seftak]

Originally posted by ProviD:

Originally posted by Seftak:

I'd prefer the devs not going under because they made 1 game 10 years ago and that's it.

EA doesn't need your help btw

Ironic since i never said to make the game full of DLC and microtransactions like those other guys want? What's "EA" about wanting Giants Soft to actually work on a better product rather than just them pushing out a "new paint for your tractors" DLC every 6 months...?

[Celieus]

Originally posted by illgib:

Originally posted by Seftak:

I'd prefer the devs not going under because they made 1 game 10 years ago and that's it.

How can they go down if instead of a new game evert three years they sell dlc for one?
Where i said they should give everything for free?

Are you ok for a 50€ mandatory "upgrade" every three years instead of 30€ dlcs that add the same things?
American and Euro truck seems pretty whealty and their games are 12 years old, still they keep getting update, dlc and old map reworks, doesn't sound as a failure market.

the reason farming simulator releases a new one every few years is most likely due to licensing contracts of the equipment brands.

[Seftak]

Originally posted by Celieus:

Originally posted by illgib:

How can they go down if instead of a new game evert three years they sell dlc for one?
Where i said they should give everything for free?

Are you ok for a 50€ mandatory "upgrade" every three years instead of 30€ dlcs that add the same things?
American and Euro truck seems pretty whealty and their games are 12 years old, still they keep getting update, dlc and old map reworks, doesn't sound as a failure market.

the reason farming simulator releases a new one every few years is most likely due to licensing contracts of the equipment brands.

Do they pay the brands for their image or are the brands paying to be in the game?